Computer Hope
Software => Computer software => Topic started by: Briguy on February 13, 2009, 12:35:15 AM
-
I would like to download a free defrag program that will put all the data on the outer edge of the hard disk platter. Does anyone know of any?
Thanks!
-
Why must the data be on the outer edge of the platter?
-
Hi Briguy, you could try this http://www.iobit.com/ (http://www.iobit.com/). There is a 'Smart Defragger' on this page. Also the 'Advanced System Care' freeware is pretty interesting.
Why must the data be on the outer edge of the platter?
Data on the outside of the platter can be read first!
-
Yeah I figured that but does it really make that big of a speed difference?
-
Hi Briguy, you could try this http://www.iobit.com/ (http://www.iobit.com/). There is a 'Smart Defragger' on this page.
So, it will allow the user to specify where files are placed on the hard drive?
-
The performance gain is a myth...unless you are living your life in nanoseconds...
And i agree with Soybean...i know of no defrag app that will do this.
-
I know a few programs that show you the distrubution of your files on the platter, but I have never seen a defragger that allows you to choose where to put them.
Does it really matter?
-
Yes there are programs that do place data on the edge. I found one it's called Ultimate Defrag. In it you can do a recency defrag and put data on the edge based upon when it was last acessed or last modified or creation date. It takes a long time. It does fragment the files up when it's moving them but don't worry about it, it does defrag them later.
-
There is an old IT proverb that says:
"Don't move data if you don't have to." :P
-
I found one it's called Ultimate Defrag.
Nothing but Hype...... ::)
-
I found one it's called Ultimate Defrag.
Nothing but Hype...... ::)
Um, I do notice a difference.... It does seem to have better performance. And before you say it's hype have you tried the program? I have.
-
I tried it a year ago...on an IDE, SATA and SCSI drive.
-
www.defraggler.com FTW!!!!
I never got the purpose of adding a process to gain performance. Doesn't one cancel out the other ??? Talking about iObit that is.
-
Are we talking about XP with NTFS?
In general terms, the defrager in Windows XP can offer modest improvements in performance. Give Microsoft some credit. The have been working with the NTFS for some time now. If you are using NTFS, use degrag only when needed. If it says you don't need it, you don't need it. Do not store a lot of archive material on the partition that has your system and programs. Keep a lot of free space on it and XP using NTFS does a good job of keeping files well arranged.
But if you really want to optimize, and if you are willing to take the time and run the modest risk, do this.
1.) Backup all your stuff, in a format where you can see the files later.
2. )Do a clean, full install of XP
3. ) Install only the Apps that you need.
4. ) Get your needed data from the backup set.
The dubious advantage of this is that stuff is store where NTFS thinks it should go. And you clean out things you do not need. But it violates the principle I stated earlier about not moving data unless you have to.
SO, if you want to do all that, why not add some better hardware while you are at it and justify the extra effort. Like get another HDD and go RAID 0 and get some performance you can brag about.
-
Ok. Is there a program that can make the data on the hard drive so that there is none or little free space between data files?
-
Does anyone know whether simply copying a group of files from one drive to another will defragment them?
I mean does the computer copy one file at a time, collecting all its fragments and assembling them on the destination drive, or does it copy any fragment of any file on the list and write it as is?
-
this was a method of defragmenting with DOS before a concerned computer nerd released a defragmenter:
take a blank floppy. put it in B:
take disk to defragment, place in A:
at prompt:
xcopy A:*.* /s B:
format A: /q /u
diskcopy B: A:
in short- copying files will defragment them but only if the target disk is empty.
-
Whilst on the subject of defrag/defraggers does anyone know why a file should show as fragmented in the MFT yet the logical sector addresses are contiguous? This is after running both Smart Defrag and MS Defrag.
Here's an example:
\cmdcons\autochk.exe
$STANDARD_INFORMATION (resident)
$FILE_NAME (resident)
$OBJECT_ID (resident)
$DATA (nonresident)
logical sectors 27481824-27481871 (0x1a356e0-0x1a3570f)
logical sectors 27481872-27481967 (0x1a35710-0x1a3576f)
logical sectors 27481968-27482071 (0x1a35770-0x1a357d7)
logical sectors 27482072-27482167 (0x1a357d8-0x1a35837)
logical sectors 27482168-27482263 (0x1a35838-0x1a35897)
logical sectors 27482264-27482351 (0x1a35898-0x1a358ef)
logical sectors 27482352-27482407 (0x1a358f0-0x1a35927)
logical sectors 27482408-27482455 (0x1a35928-0x1a35957)
logical sectors 27482456-27482511 (0x1a35958-0x1a3598f)
Thanks
-
Ok. Is there a program that can make the data on the hard drive so that there is none or little free space between data files?
Full free space consolidation is good if the only future file activity is going to be file writes. Contiguous space means sequential writes, so writes will be faster.
But if the files in the consolidated block are modified/expanded, they won't have enough space to grow and will immediately fragment, undoing most of the work done in consolidation.
What i've noticed is that my defragmenter, Diskeeper 2009 Pro that has a file sequencing algorithm built-in, pushes some least used files to the end of the logical drive, and the others are pushed to the beginning. This leaves in the middle, a large block of contiguous free space. I think this is a good strategy. But I don't think too much about it or waste time with micromanaging all this...my Diskeeper is set on full auto infact.
Don't worry about minor tweaks, enjoy using the computer instead. :)